1. Field
This application relates to fish bite indicators, specifically to an electronic fishing alarm for producing an alert in response to a fish bite when using a hanging bite indicator.
2. Prior Art
When a baited fishing line is set in water from an immobilized fishing rod and reel, such as one positioned from shore, a fish bite or nibble can be detected with high efficiency by assessing changes in tension in the fishing line. It is common practice for fishermen to monitor changes in fishing line tension by hanging a weighted mass (such as a modified fishing bobber) on baited fishing line for use as a visual bite indicator. In this case, the weighted mass is suspended on fishing line guided between eyelets of the fishing rod where it sags so that tension produced in the line by a fish bite causes the weighted mass to move up and down relative to the rod. Fishing line tension can then be tracked by observing vertical displacements of the hanging weighted mass, hereinafter referred to as the freely hanging visual bite indicator, or alternatively, the hanging bite indicator. Use of this method allows the fisherman to observe changes in fishing line tension from the time of initial fish bite to the point of setting the hook, thus providing means to visually monitor the pattern of fish bites that lead up to the fish fully taking the bait. Monitoring bite activity over time in this manner enables the fisherman to determine when best to hook the fish.
Despite its effectiveness, a major drawback of using the hanging bite indicator method is that it typically requires the fisherman to maintain constant visual focus on the weighted mass as movements indicative of a fish bite can be quick and sporadic, and easily missed. Anglers attempting to identify a fish bite event at its earliest stages, so as to allow the greatest window of time to act in hooking the fish, may be most burdened by adhering to this visual requirement. A number of fish bite indicators described in prior art are designed to help fishermen detect changes in fishing line tension, but few of these inventions address methods to facilitate detection of a fish bite when using a hanging bite indicator and none have been found to adapt for use with virtually any hanging bite indicator, such as one supplied by the user.
The use of hanging bite indicators or the principles thereof in the detection of a fish bite has gained widespread acceptance over several decades as an effective method for fishing. An apparatus that operates as a hanging bite indicator was initially described by Cunningham (1978) in U.S. Pat. No. 4,125,957. This apparatus employs a weighted slack ring device that is slidably attached to baited fishing line guided between two eyelets of the rod. The weighted ring device sags on slack in the line when extended for fishing so that tension produced in the line by a fish bite causes it to elevate, thereby providing a visual indication of the fish bite. A second device disclosed by Cunningham (1980) in U.S. Pat. No. 4,236,340 further employs the principles of the hanging bite indicator with an apparatus comprising a weighted mass attached to a support structure that is then mounted onto the fishing rod. The support structure permits use of the hanging bite indicator on fishing line independent of the rod eyelets.
Additional implementation of the hanging bite indicator method is demonstrated by Durham (1985) in U.S. Pat. No. 4,552,318, in which a hanging bite indicator designed for use with a closed face reel is placed on fishing line guided between the reel and a forwardly positioned rod eyelet to enable sagging on the line as a visual bite indicator. A variation of this apparatus for use with any type of fishing reel was subsequently disclosed by Sousa (1987) in U.S. Pat. No. 4,702,031, in which the apparatus is suspended upon fishing line guided between two eyelets of the fishing rod where it then sags upon the line as a visual bite indicator. Over the years, the methods similar to those described by Cunningham and Sousa (i.e. involving placement of a hanging bite indicator between two eyelets of the fishing rod) have become conventional and use of improvised hanging bite indicators in this regard has become common. However, despite being effective and widely used for fishing, these methods do not provide an alternative, non-visual alert means, and thus require the user to keep constant watch on the hanging bite indicator so as to not miss a fish bite. Maintaining visual attention in this manner during fishing can be time-consuming, tedious, and at times impractical.
The prior art includes additional examples of fish bite detection devices that have been developed based on the principles of the hanging bite indicator. The devices described by Deskevich (1992) in U.S. Pat. No. 5,077,928, Cube (1999) in U.S. Pat. No. 5,884,429, and Barnhart (2009) in U.S. Pat. No. 7,478,498 all implement versions of the hanging bite indicator method to provide a visual indication of a fish bite. Another apparatus described in the pending patent application submitted by Sanchez (2012) in Pub. No. US/2012/0222345 A1 bears strong similarity in design and operation to a conventional hanging bite indicator that is improvised from an ordinary fishing bobber modified with an open snap swivel to enable removable hanging on the fishing line. While these devices continue to demonstrate use of the hanging bite indicator as an effective and desired method for fishing, they do not address means to facilitate detection of a fish bite by providing a non-visual alert.
Brent et al. (1996) describe an apparatus in U.S. Pat. No. 5,586,402 designed to enhance detection of a fish bite using a detachable clamping mechanism that attaches to the fishing rod and operates based on principles of the hanging bite indicator. In this case, fishing line guided between eyelets of the rod is passed through a spiral line guide at the bottom end of a visual indicator rod in a manner that simulates sagging on the line. When tension is produced in the line by a fish bite, the visual indicator rod is forced to slide upward to expose a brightly colored visual alert. A device disclosed by Copeland (2011) in U.S. Pat. No. 7,963,065 B1 functions similarly to that of Brent et al. as a clamping mechanism that operates on principles of the hanging bite indicator. However, these devices also do not implement a non-visual alert means, but instead require the user to maintain focus on the visual indicator rod. Moreover, these devices employ larger and more complex mechanisms that attach to the fishing rod compared to a conventional hanging bite indicator that is generally less obtrusive and only attaches to the fishing line, as previously described. It is often undesirable to affix accessories to the fishing rod while fishing as this may compromise the structure and/or function of the rod. Thus, the benefit of any enhanced alert means provided by these clamping mechanisms may be outweighed by drawbacks in their method of attachment to the fishing gear or in their relative inefficiency of transport with fishing tackle compared to conventional hanging bite indicators.
The prior art further contains examples of devices that incorporate some form of audible alert with a hanging bite indicator. In the apparatus disclosed by Phipps (1997) in U.S. Pat. No. 5,669,175, fishing line is threaded through grooves in two opposing balance arms attached to a main body of mass that functions as a hanging bite indicator. In this configuration, the weighted mass remains balanced and hanging on the line in a static position. Upon a fish bite, the fishing line detaches from the grooves in the balance arms, causing the weighted mass to fall and produce an audible sound upon impact. A similar method is proposed in the patent application by Zeglen (2007) in Pub. No. US2007/0068062 A1, in which a removable hanging bite indicator attached to a bell falls off of the fishing line upon a violent fish bite and produces an audible alert upon impact with the ground. Although these methods do incorporate an audible alert with a hanging bite indicator, they do so with a significant drawback. The alarm is short-lived and can be missed if not perceived by the fisherman at the moment it is sounded. It does not provide an audible alarm that continuously sounds until the user disarms it, such as after the audible alert is perceived.
Another apparatus proposed in the patent application of Altrich et al. (2004) in Pub. No. US2004/0088899 A1 uses a hanging bite indicator with a bell attached to the bottom side in order to provide an audible alert means that responds to movement. However, bells can be suboptimal for alerting a fisherman of a fish bite when used in the context of a hanging bite indicator because a threshold level of force is typically required by the biting fish to pull the hanging bite indicator violently enough to cause the bell to ring. Therefore, fish nibbles or bites resulting in only minute increases in fishing line tension may go unnoticed when using this apparatus.
A number of devices disclosed in the prior art have also been designed to implement electronic alarms to deliver an audible alert upon detection of a fish bite. The majority of these devices require the fishing line to be directly attached to the apparatus in order to sense tension due to a fish bite. For example, some devices operate by attaching the baited fishing line to a lever arm that can then actuate a switch upon a fish bite to produce an audible alarm. These include the devices introduced by Fox (2001) in U.S. Pat. No. 6,308,452 B1, Winter (2002) in U.S. Pat. No. 6,408,561 B1, and Kirby (2009) in U.S. Pat. No. 7,624,531 B2. In these cases, baited fishing line is drawn down from the rod from either between two eyelets or between the reel and a forwardly positioned eyelet in order to connect it to a lever arm on the apparatus. Furthermore, an apparatus described by Draghici (2000) in U.S. Pat. No. 6,101,757 employs a conductive clip that attaches to baited fishing line drawn down from between two eyelets of the rod to simulate sagging in the line. When a fish bites, the upward pull produced in the fishing line causes the clip to detach from the line and fall onto an electrical contact, thereby completing an electrical circuit that activates an electronic alert. Despite having electronic alarm features to facilitate bite detection, these devices are not designed for use with a hanging bite indicator, and thus may appear less appealing to individuals who prefer to use a hanging bite indicator when fishing.
Lastly, there are other devices unrelated to hanging bite indicators that provide an electronic alert means of a fish bite based on movement or bowing produced in the tip of the rod. One example of this type of apparatus is presented by Reams (2001) in U.S. Pat. No. 6,253,483, in which the apparatus is attached to the tip of the fishing rod so that movement or bowing of the tip brings two sensor wires together to complete an alarm circuit and activate an audible alarm. A major drawback of this method, however, is in its sensitivity to fish bites, since in this case a certain threshold of pulling force by the biting fish is required to produce enough tension in the line to cause a sufficient degree of movement or bowing at the tip of the rod. Therefore, it is possible for fishing line to be drawn from the rod or reel by the fish without causing the rod tip to move. In this instance, an angler could miss detection of a fish bite or nibble that manifests as only a minute increase in fishing line tension. Moreover, it is argued that producing an audible alert from an audio source that is contiguous with the fishing line or rod may cause an undesirable transmission of sound down the fishing line that ultimately deters interest of the biting fish for the bait. An angler can avoid these drawbacks by using a hanging bite indicator.